This invention relates to chemically synthesized non-nucleotide-containing enzymatic nucleic acid.
The following is a brief history of the discovery and activity of enzymatic RNA molecules or ribozymes. This history is not meant to be complete but is provided only for understanding of the invention that follows. This summary is not an admission that all of the work described below is prior art to the claimed invention.
Prior to the 1970s it was thought that all genes were direct linear representations of the proteins that they encoded. This simplistic view implied that all genes were like ticker tape messages, with each triplet of DNA “letters” representing one protein “word” in the translation. Protein synthesis occurred by first transcribing a gene from DNA into RNA (letter for letter) and then translating the RNA into protein (three letters at a time). In the mid 1970s it was discovered that some genes were not exact, linear representations of the proteins that they encode. These genes were found to contain interruptions in the coding sequence which were removed from, or “spliced, out” of, the RNA before it became translated into protein. These interruptions in the coding sequence were given the name of intervening sequences (or introns) and the process of removing them from the RNA was termed splicing. At least three different mechanisms have been discovered for removing introns from RNA. Two of these splicing mechanisms involve the binding of multiple protein factors which then act to correctly cut and join the RNA. A third mechanism involves cutting and joining of the RNA by the intron itself, in what was the first discovery of catalytic RNA molecules.
Cech and colleagues were trying to understand how RNA splicing was accomplished in a single-celled pond organism called Tetrahymena thermophila. Cech proved that the intervening sequence RNA was acting as its own splicing factor to snip itself out of the surrounding RNA. Continuing studies in the early 1980's served to elucidate the complicated structure of the Tetrahymena intron and to decipher the mechanism by which self-splicing occurs. Many research groups helped to demonstrate that the specific folding of the Tetrahymena intron is critical for bringing together the parts of the RNA that will be cut and spliced. Even after splicing is complete, the released intron maintains its catalytic structure. As a consequence, the released intron is capable of carrying out additional cleavage and splicing reactions on itself (to form intron circles). By 1986, Cech was able to show that a shortened form of the Tetrahymena intron could carry out a variety of cutting and joining reactions on other pieces of RNA. The demonstration proved that the Tetrahymena intron can act as a true enzyme: (i) each intron molecule was able to cut many substrate molecules while the intron molecule remained unchanged, and (ii) reactions were specific for RNA molecules that contained a unique sequence (CUCU) which allowed the intron to recognize and bind the RNA. Zaug and Cech coined the term “ribozyme” to describe any ribonucleic acid molecule that has enzyme-like properties.
Also in 1986, Cech showed that the RNA substrate sequence recognized by the Tetrahymena ribozyme could be changed by altering a sequence within the ribozyme itself. This property has led to the development of a number of site-specific ribozymes that have been individually designed to cleave at other RNA sequences.
The Tetrahymena intron is the most well-studied of what is now recognized as a large class of introns, Group I introns. The overall folded structure, including several sequence elements, is conserved among the Group I introns, as is the general mechanism of splicing. Like the Tetrahymena intron, some members of this class are catalytic, i.e., the intron itself is capable of the self-splicing reaction. Other Group I introns require additional (protein) factors, presumably to help the intron fold into and/or maintain its active structure.
Ribonuclease P (RNaseP) is an enzyme comprised of both RNA and protein components which are responsible for converting precursor tRNA molecules into their final form by trimming extra RNA off one of their ends. RNaseP activity has been found in all organisms tested. Sidney Altman and his colleagues showed that the RNA component of RNaseP is essential for its processing activity; however, they also showed that the protein component also was required for processing under their experimental conditions. After Cech's discovery of self-splicing by the Tetrahymena intron, the requirement for both protein and RNA components in RNaseP was reexamined. In 1983, Altman and Pace showed that the RNA was the enzymatic component of the RNaseP complex. This demonstrated that an RNA molecule was capable of acting as a true enzyme, processing numerous tRNA molecules without itself undergoing any change.
The folded structure of RNaseP RNA has been determined, and while the sequence is not strictly conserved between RNAs from different organisms, this higher order structure is. It is thought that the protein component of the RNaseP complex may serve to stabilize the folded RNA in vivo.
Symons and colleagues identified two examples of a self-cleaving RNA that differed from other forms of catalytic RNA already reported. Symons was studying the propagation of the avocado sunblotch viroid (ASV), an RNA virus that infects avocado plants. Symons demonstrated that as little as 55 nucleotides of the ASV RNA was capable of folding in such a way as to cut itself into two pieces. It is thought that in vivo self-cleavage of these RNAs is responsible for cutting the RNA into single genome-length pieces during viral propagation. Symons discovered that variations on the minimal catalytic sequence from ASV could be found in a number of other plant pathogenic RNAs as well. Comparison of these sequences' revealed a common structural design consisting of three stems and loops connected by a central loop containing many conserved (invariant from one RNA to the next) nucleotides. The predicted secondary structure for this catalytic RNA reminded the researchers of the head of a hammer; thus it was named as such.
Uhlenbeck was successful in separating the catalytic region of the ribozyme from that of the substrate. Thus, it became possible to assemble a hammerhead ribozyme from 2 (or 3) small synthetic RNAs. A 19-nucleotide catalytic region and a 24-nucleotide substrate were sufficient to support specific cleavage. The catalytic domain of numerous hammerhead ribozymes have now been studied by both the Uhlenbeck's and Symons' groups with regard to defining the nucleotides required for specific assembly and catalytic activity, and determining the rates of cleavage under various conditions.
Haseloff and Gedach showed it was possible to divide the domains of the hammerhead ribozyme in a different manner. By doing so, they placed most of the required sequences in the strand that did not get cut (the ribozyme) and only a required UH where H=C, A, or U in the strand that did get cut (the substrate). This resulted in a catalytic ribozyme that could be designed to cleave any UH RNA sequence embedded within a longer “substrate recognition” sequence. The specific cleavage of a long mRNA, in a predictable manner using several such hammerhead ribozymes, was reported in 1988.
One plant pathogen RNA (from the negative strand of the tobacco ringspot virus) undergoes self-cleavage but cannot be folded into the consensus hammerhead structure described above. Bruening and colleagues have independently identified a 50-nucleotide catalytic domain for this RNA. In 1990, Hampei and Tritz succeeded in dividing the catalytic domain into two parts that could act as substrate and ribozyme in a multiple-turnover, cutting reaction. As with the hammerhead ribozyme, the catalytic portion contains most of the sequences required for catalytic activity, while only a short sequence (GUC in this case) is required in the target. Hampel and Tritz described the folded structure of this RNA as consisting of a single hairpin and coined the term “hairpin” Ribozyme (Bruening and colleagues use the term “paperclip” for this ribozyme motif). Continuing experiments suggest an increasing number of similarities between the hairpin and hammerhead ribozymes in respect to both binding of target RNA and mechanism of cleavage.
Hepatitis Delta Virus (HDV) is a virus whose genome consists of single-stranded RNA. A small region (about 80 nucleotides) in both the genomic RNA, and in the complementary anti-genomic RNA, is sufficient to support self-cleavage. In 1991, Been and Perrotta proposed a secondary structure for the HDV RNAs that is conserved between the genomic and anti-genomic RNAs and is necessary for catalytic activity. Separation of the HDV RNA into “ribozyme” and “substrate” portions has recently been achieved by Been. Been has also succeeded in reducing the size of the HDV ribozyme to about 60 nucleotides.
Table I lists some of the characteristics of the ribozymes discussed above.
Eckstein et al., International Publication No. WO 92/07065; Perrault et al., Nature 1990, 344:565; Pieken et al., Science 1991, 253:314; Usman and Cedergren, Trends in Biochem. Sci. 1992, 17:334; and Rossi et al., International Publication No. WO 91/03162, describe various chemical modifications that can be made to the sugar moieties of enzymatic nucleic acid molecules.
Usman, et al., WO 93/15187 in discussing modified structures in ribozymes states:                It should be understood that the linkages between the building units of the polymeric chain may be linkages capable of bridging the units together for either in vitro or in vivo. For example the linkage may be a phosphorous containing linkage, e.g., phosphodiester or phosphothioate, or may be a nitrogen containing linkage, e.g., amide. It should further be understood that the chimeric polymer may contain non-nucleotide spacer molecules along with its other nucleotide or analogue units. Examples of spacer molecules which may be used are described in Nielsen et al. Science, 254:1497-1500 (1991).        
Jennings et al., WO 94/13688 while discussing hammerhead ribozymes lacking the usual stem II base-paired region state:                One or more ribonucleotides and/or deoxydbonucleotides of the group (X)m, [stem II] may be replaced, for example, with a linker selected from optionally substituted polyphosphodiester (such as poly(1-phospho-3-propanol)), optionally substituted alkyl, optionally substituted polyamide, optionally substituted glycol, and the like. Optional substituents are well known in the art, and include alkoxy (such as methoxy, ethoxy and propoxy), straight or branch chain lower alkyl such as C1-C5 alkyl), amine, aminoalkyl (such as amino C1-C5 alkyl), halogen (such as F, Cl and Br) and the like. The nature of optional substituents is not of importance, as long as the resultant endonuclease is capable of substrate cleavage.        Additionally, suitable linkers may comprise polycyclic molecules, such as those containing phenyl or cyclohexyl rings. The linker (L) may be a polyether such as polyphosphopropanediol, polyethyleneglycol, a bifunctional polycyclic molecule such as a bifunctional pentalene, indene, naphthalene, azulene, heptalene, biphenylene, asymindacene, sym-indacene, acenaphthylene, fluorene, phenalene, phenanthrene, anthracene, fluoranthene, acephenathrylene, aceanthrylene, triphenylene, pyrene, chrysene, naphthacene, thianthrene, isobenzofuran, chromene, xanthene, phenoxathiin, indolizine, isoindole, 3-H-indole, indole, 1-H-indazole, 4-H-quinolizine, isoquinoline, quinoline, phthalazine, naphthyridine, quinoxaline, quinazoline, cinnoline, pteridine, 4-αH-carbzole, carbazole, B-carboline, phenanthridine, acridine, perimidine, phenanthroline, phenazine, phenolthiazine, phenoxazine, which polycyctic compound may be substituted or modified, or a combination of the polyethers and the polycyclic molecules.        The polycyclic molecule may be substituted of polysubstituted with C1-C5 alkyl, alkenyl, hydroxyalkyi, halogen of haloalkyl group or with O—A or CH2—O—A wherein A is H or has the formula CONR′R″ wherein R′ and R″ are the same or different and are hydrogen or a substituted or unsubstituted C1-C6 alkyl, aryl, cycloalkyl, or heterocyclic group; or A has the formula —M—NR′R″ wherein R′ and R″ are the same or different and are hydrogen, or a C1-C5 alkyl, alkenyl, hydroxyalkyl, or haloalkyl group, wherein the halo atom is fluorine, chlorine, bromine, or iodine atom; and —M— is an organic moiety having 1 to 10 carbon atoms and is a branched or straight chain alkyl, aryl, or cycloalkyl group.        In one embodiment, the linker is tetraphosphopropanediol or Pentaphosphopropanediol. In the case of polycyclic molecules there will be preferably 18 or more atoms bridging the nucleic acids. More preferably their will be from 30 to 50 atoms bridging, see for Example 5. In another embodiment the linker is a bifunctional carbazole or bifunctional carbazole linked to one or more polyphosphoropropanediol.        Such compounds may also comprise suitable functional groups to allow coupling through reactive groups on nucleotides.”        